Jeff,
I really am a prime user, and find these smaller zooms good when I
workng in caves to set up a large format shot I might come back and try
later. The 100mm of the 35-100 is just not needed in the small
caves/caverns I frequent. I have a 100mm prime I use outside lanscapes,
or a 65-200/f4 for people shots. I am a true Zuikoholc however, and I am
looking to get this lens eventually, just not now. I need a 300mm, an
85/f2, and a 21mm before that. Anyone want to donate any of these to a
desperate Zuikoholic. I'll give you one of my 50mm/f1.8s in return;-).
Thanks,
John
"Jeffrey R. Keller" wrote:
>
> Should also consider the 35-100mm. It's a good lens and the extra length
> is nice.
>
> -jeff
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] Which 35-70Zuiko
>
> > Ah, one of the favorite Zuikuestions. In the range, nothing is better than
> > the 35-80 f/2.8. The price, unfortunately, is quite high -- around $1000
> > used (yes, gasp).
> >
> > Of the remaining four, the 35-70/3.6 is the sharpest (it was the top of the
> > line until the 35-80 came out), but also heavy. The 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 is
> > light and wonderful, my personal favorite.
> >
> > The 35-70 f/4 is between the too, closer to the size of the 3.6, but
> > lighter, bigger than the 3.5-4.5. I think the 3.5-4.5 replaced the f/4. Not
> > a bad lens, and certainly the best bargain in the bunch.
> >
> > The last choice, literally, is the 35-70/3.5-4.8 (notice the 4.8). It's a
> > Cosina made lens, marked as a Zuiko and usually came in a kit with the
> > OM-2000. Just not on par with the others.
> >
> > For my personal choice, the 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 wins, hands-down. Light and
> > easy to use. Nice and sharp. A wonderful travel lens. My second choice
> > would be the 35-70/3.6. A better lens, and sharper, but at a weight
> > penalty. If you want to experiment with the focal length at the lowest
> > price, pick up a 35-70/4 and use it. If you like the focal length, sell it
> > and 'upgrade'.
> >
> > By the way, the 35-70/3.5-4.5 and the 28-48/4 feel very similar.
> >
> > Didn't help, did I <g>.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John&Julie Ockman" <jrockman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Olympus List" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 2:04 PM
> > Subject: [OM] Which 35-70Zuiko
> >
> >
> > > Hello all Zuikoholics,
> > >
> > > What is your favorite of the 3 Zuiko 35mm-70mm lenses? Which one has
> > > the best bokeh? And which is the sharpest in you eye? I have a
> > > 28mm-48mm/f4 that I am absolutely in love with(yes, my wife knows), but
> > > am thinking of getting a 35mm-70mm for that little added length. None of
> > > the prices on them seem exorbitant, so I am not that worried about the
> > > prices. Or maybe, I should stick with my 28mm-48mm/f4, 28mm/f2.8, and
> > > 100mm/f2.8, and forget another lens.
> > > Regards,
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|